An Empirical Comparison of Methods for Quantifying the Similarity of Categorical Datasets
Fuente:
arXiv
Salvato in:
| Autori principali: | , , |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Preprint |
| Pubblicazione: |
2026
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1866914469186109440 |
|---|---|
| author | Stolte, Marieke Rahnenführer, Jörg Bommert, Andrea |
| author_facet | Stolte, Marieke Rahnenführer, Jörg Bommert, Andrea |
| contents | Quantifying the similarity of two or more datasets has widespread applications in statistics and machine learning. The method choice is, however, difficult due to the abundance of proposed methods and the lack of neutral comparison studies, especially for categorical data. Here, the most promising methods are compared concerning their ability to detect certain differences between datasets and their resource consumption. The results show that the edge count tests perform well when comparing two datasets (i.e., the two-sample case). For certain scenarios, the constrained minimum (CM) distance performs even better. For categorical data consisting of variables with five categories each, the best method depends on the type of difference between the distributions, with either the CM distance and certain graph-based tests performing best, or the classifier-based tests (C2ST). This tendency is even clearer for multiple datasets. Overall, the Friedman-Rafsky test can be recommended for two samples as a compromise of high performance, acceptable resource consumption, and computational error occurrences. For the multi-sample case, the Multi-Sample Mahalanobis Cross-Match (MMCM) test can be recommended due to its comparably good performance and low resource consumption. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2604_11458 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | An Empirical Comparison of Methods for Quantifying the Similarity of Categorical Datasets Stolte, Marieke Rahnenführer, Jörg Bommert, Andrea Methodology Computation 62E99, 62G10, 62H15, 62H30, 05C90 Quantifying the similarity of two or more datasets has widespread applications in statistics and machine learning. The method choice is, however, difficult due to the abundance of proposed methods and the lack of neutral comparison studies, especially for categorical data. Here, the most promising methods are compared concerning their ability to detect certain differences between datasets and their resource consumption. The results show that the edge count tests perform well when comparing two datasets (i.e., the two-sample case). For certain scenarios, the constrained minimum (CM) distance performs even better. For categorical data consisting of variables with five categories each, the best method depends on the type of difference between the distributions, with either the CM distance and certain graph-based tests performing best, or the classifier-based tests (C2ST). This tendency is even clearer for multiple datasets. Overall, the Friedman-Rafsky test can be recommended for two samples as a compromise of high performance, acceptable resource consumption, and computational error occurrences. For the multi-sample case, the Multi-Sample Mahalanobis Cross-Match (MMCM) test can be recommended due to its comparably good performance and low resource consumption. |
| title | An Empirical Comparison of Methods for Quantifying the Similarity of Categorical Datasets |
| topic | Methodology Computation 62E99, 62G10, 62H15, 62H30, 05C90 |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.11458 |